Re: Commercial Alarm - help

[J. Sloud <jsloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2 Nov 2005 20:35:42 -0800, "Jim" <alarminex@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>J! wake up!
>
>I don't believe I've got to go though this with someone who's in the
>trade.
>
>If you have 20,000 alarm signals being received a month and all but a
>few are false, you're saying that they have a 99% false alarm rate.
>Now, lets say they do a revamp of the alarm systems, get every end user
>to take alarm classes, set up fines and the alarm signals are reduced
>to a fantastically low, 1000 alarm signals a month with all but a few
>being false. By YOUR reckoning, all alarm systems have a 99% false
>alarm rate.
>
>You're throwing this 99% around as if all alarm systems are sending in
>false alarm signals and you're completely ignoring and not comparing it
>to the actual number of systems that are installed.

Not at all.  I'm only using numbers reported by law enforcement.
According to all reports I've read that well over 90% of the time when
police respond to a burglar alarm, it turns out to be a false.

Most reports say 99%. That's the number.

What evidence do you have to support another number?

The number of systems installed is irrelevant.  That isn't going to
affect legislation.  Law makers only care about where the tax dollars
are being mis-spent.  When the cops go to them and say we're wasting
our time 99% of the time with false alarms, companies like your go out
of business.